Exact timestamps may be bad

Volker Gaibler volker.gaibler@urz.uni-heidelberg.de
Tue Jul 30 01:38:04 2002


On Mon, Jul 29, 2002 at 11:47:56AM -0400, David Shaw wrote:
> I tend to have an allergy to trusting anyone but the sender for this

so have I, but in case you really want to use anonymous remailers you
have to trust the remailers. They can surrender your identity and crypto
won't help.

> sort of thing.  What if Alice were to increment her timestamps as she
> goes - that is, first message use 1, second message use 2, etc.  That
> should defeat replay, and also hide the real clock value.  The
> timestamp field is 32 bits, so she can send quite a few messages
> before it rolls over.
> It's somewhat of an abuse of the timestamp field, but who's to say
> that Alice doesn't really think it's some time in 1970? ;)

The timestamp would be a counter now. No objections at the moment.


 Volker Gaibler                                 contact:
 http://www.volker-gaibler.de                   mail@volker-gaibler.de
 OpenPGP key: 0x86ECAC0B
 get my public key from website above